Dina Barnese on thu 18 jan 07
Hi folks,
I always read my daily digest with interest and fascination - there is
just so much to learn, and I love to read all of the different opinions
(well... almost all of them!)
I am interested in a couple of comments in some recent posts regarding
commercial glazes and the use of stains. How do you feel about the use
of both?
Is the use of commercial stains considered 'cheating'? Is there an
ethical problem with using stains? Is that cheating?
I would love to hear your opinions on both.
Thanks!
Dina
Flagstaff, AZ (brrrrr!)
Paul Lewing on thu 18 jan 07
On Jan 18, 2007, at 9:11 AM, Dina Barnese wrote:
Is the use of commercial stains considered 'cheating'? Is there an
ethical problem with using stains? Is that cheating?
Here's my opinion: Nothing is cheating! The only thing that matters
is what your art looks like when it's done. If it looks like what
you wanted it to look like, that's good. Anything that detracts from
that is bad.
Let's not pretend that we're 15th century Japanese peasant potters
when we're 21st century urban Americans. If you want glazes that are
lime green and fuschia, you're not going to get them with 15th
century Japanese materials. It's stupid to even try. And I think
that if 15th century Japanese potters had wanted lime green and
fuschia, they would have leaped at the chance to use stains.
Certainly the 11th century Chinese potters who were using refined and
imported cobalt from the Middle East to make their blue and white
porcelain didn't think that was cheating. They were using the best
and easiest method to get what they wanted.
The best thing about art is that there are no right answers, and
there are no wrong answers. There is YOUR answer.
Having said that, the bad thing about using stains, and more so
commercial glazes, is that if something goes wrong, you don't know
how to fix it. That's assuming you never used anything but
commercial glazes.
There aren't a lot of people who have done more glaze tests than I
have, but I use one commercial glaze on almost every tile piece I
do. I could easily make a glaze just like it. I have recipes for
any number of similar glazes. I could also very easily make up a
recipe on the spot that would look pretty much like it. But I like
this one- it does exactly what I want it to do, it's consistent, and
it comes already mixed in 50 pound bags. If that's cheating, so be
it. Why should I care what anyone else thinks about my art anyway?
Paul Lewing
www.paullewingtile.com
Lois Ruben Aronow on thu 18 jan 07
This is a good question (not that there are any bad ones). The opinion I
express is purely my own - I know a lot of people will disagree with me.
No, using commercial stains is not "cheating". Adding stains to a glaze or
a clay body requires just as much - sometimes more - knowledge than adding
oxides. I say this because stains are essentially frits, and they will
change the chemistry of your glaze. You still need all the knowledge (and
all the testing) for stains as you do for oxides.
In addition, you can mix stains to achieve different shades and tones of
color.
As with anything done well, test test test. Having plenty of knowledge and
experience - and knowing how to use it - is NEVER "cheating".
*******
Lois Ruben Aronow Ceramics
232 Third Street - # B202A
Brooklyn, NY 11215
p: 917..561..2854
f: 718..246.0819
www.loisaronow.com
www.craftsofthedamned.blogspot.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Clayart [mailto:CLAYART@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG] On Behalf Of Dina Barnese
Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2007 12:11 PM
To: CLAYART@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG
Subject: Commercial glazes & stains
Hi folks,
I always read my daily digest with interest and fascination - there is just
so much to learn, and I love to read all of the different opinions (well...
almost all of them!)
I am interested in a couple of comments in some recent posts regarding
commercial glazes and the use of stains. How do you feel about the use of
both?
Is the use of commercial stains considered 'cheating'? Is there an ethical
problem with using stains? Is that cheating?
I would love to hear your opinions on both.
Thanks!
Dina
Flagstaff, AZ (brrrrr!)
____________________________________________________________________________
__
Send postings to clayart@lsv.ceramics.org
You may look at the archives for the list or change your subscription
settings from http://www.ceramics.org/clayart/
Moderator of the list is Mel Jacobson who may be reached at
melpots@pclink.com.
Snail Scott on fri 19 jan 07
At 10:11 AM 1/18/2007 -0700, you wrote:
>Is the use of commercial stains considered 'cheating'? Is there an
>ethical problem with using stains?
Good god, why? I don't make my own
frits, either. It would time-consuming
and exacting work to make my own stains,
and probably require equipment I don't
have and processes I don't yet know,
but big companies will do it efficiently
and accurately and sell the result to me.
I also don't care to process my own
cadmium or vanadium. Perhaps some folks
desire colors or chemistries that
commercial stains can't satisfy, and
others like to do it all for themselves
'just because'. While there may be a
range of reasons to use something other
than commercial stains, I can't think of
any reason to NOT use them if they suit
your needs. There are practical concerns,
of course (cost, or availability), but
'ethical' concerns? The mind boggles!
What could possibly be unethical about
buying a processed material? I buy
processed dry clays, and even pre-mixed
ones. I bought a pre-made kiln. I buy
tools made by others. Some folks use
press-molds that were commercially made
either for that purpose or another. I
also buy commercially-made glazes, which
probably have stains in quite a few of
them. Why do it for myself, when for a
price (which I can judge the fairness of)
someone else will do it just as well as
I could, freeing my time and effort for
things that can't be delegated. I see
Ferro, Laguna, Spectrum, MudTools, Skutt
and others as studio assistants without
the payroll hassles. They don't make my
work, but they aid me in making it, and
I'm glad to have their help.
I know a few painters who mix their own
paints from scratch. They are considered
by most observers to be a little odd, if
not actually nuts. And that 'scratch' is
commercially-prepared vehicles, binders,
and pigments! They may build their own
stretcher bars, but I don't know of a
single one who weaves their own canvas.
Still, I can't think of anyone who would
seriously judge a painting on those terms.
Paintings are judged by the result. Period.
It's some medieval-romantic notion of
nostalgia that undermines craftwork with
notions of 'ethical' processes. Processes
to not have an ethical component, people
do. If there is a claim falsely made, that
is an ethical issue, but how can an object
be falsely made?
If the only merit to my work is the
labor-intensive nature of the process,
then I'm either witless or talentless.
I'm not going for some Ripley's Believe-
it-or-Not niche: "Wow, she even made the
stains from scratch!" Who cares? Not many,
I'd guess, and is that really the way I
want them to care about my work? NO! The
aspects that I want to matter don't come
out of any commercial packet or jar, no
matter how many of them went into making
it.
I may do something from scratch for
reasons of poverty, or because I truly
find a reward in the process, but not
because it's unethical to do otherwise.
-Snail
Ivor and Olive Lewis on fri 19 jan 07
Dear Dina Barnese,
Nothing wrong with being a "Purist" but this can have its limitations.
Opening one's mind to the range of commercials stains provides access to =
a very wide colour palette which can be adapted for stained clay, =
undergalze, in-glaze and overglaze decoration. They are Ceramic =
Materials and therefore legitimate to the tasks we perform.
Would a painter refuse to use acrylic media just because it was not in =
the traditional list that comes down from antiquity. Just imagine the =
consternation when Oil paint hit the scene in the early Renaissance. =
Can't use that. Got to stick with Fresco and Egg Tempera.
People who think it is unethical to use Manufactured Stains are probably =
bigots.
Best regards,
Ivor Lewis.
Redhill,
South Australia.
Lois Ruben Aronow on fri 19 jan 07
Those things are wrong?!? ;-0
I totally agree - whatever works for you. Just don't try and pass a
completely commercial glaze off as your own concoction. Ethically wrong.
(the credit taking, not the use of commercial glaze).
When I worked in the UK, they had never seen pot lifters, but I never had to
use them again after that course.
-----Original Message-----
From: Clayart [mailto:CLAYART@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG] On Behalf Of sacredclay
Sent: Friday, January 19, 2007 11:28 PM
To: CLAYART@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG
Subject: Re: Commercial glazes & stains
I'm of an opinion, as usual, that whatever works for you, and cheaters be
damned. some people get their pantyhose up in a bunch if you use a
blowdryer to stiffen the clay. some think that using pot lifters are unholy
contraptions.and using acryllic paints don't count as real decoration. Who
cares? It's your business, no one else.there's many roads on the path to
clay and many are convergents in ways as well as divergent. Enjoy! Kathryn
in NC---> At 10:11 AM 1/18/2007 -0700, you
wrote:
> >Is the use of commercial stains considered 'cheating'? Is there an
> >ethical problem with using stains?
>
>
____________________________________________________________________________
__
Send postings to clayart@lsv.ceramics.org
You may look at the archives for the list or change your subscription
settings from http://www.ceramics.org/clayart/
Moderator of the list is Mel Jacobson who may be reached at
melpots@pclink.com.
sacredclay on sat 20 jan 07
I'm of an opinion, as usual, that whatever works for you, and cheaters
be damned. some people get their pantyhose up in a bunch if you use a
blowdryer to stiffen the clay. some think that using pot lifters are
unholy contraptions.and using acryllic paints don't count as real
decoration. Who cares? It's your business, no one else.there's many
roads on the path to clay and many are convergents in ways as well as
divergent. Enjoy! Kathryn in NC---> At 10:11 AM 1/18/2007 -0700, you
wrote:
> >Is the use of commercial stains considered 'cheating'? Is there an
> >ethical problem with using stains?
>
>
Ron Roy on sun 21 jan 07
I think Paul means for glazes that don't come in contact with food -
because judging a glaze by how it looks for functionality just simply does
not work.
In fact I would advise anyone using stains to find out whats in em before
deciding which to use - especially if they are going into a liner glaze.
There are also the health aspects to the potter - when mixing glazes and
firing them. That all gets worse if the studio and kiln are in a residence
- then the whole family has to breath that air.
I'm looking in a catalogue - at some Mason stains - there are 4 black
stains - three are chrome free - one is manganese free - two are nickel
free. If you don't understand the toxicity of those oxides then inform
yourself and find out how to use and fire them safely - and use them with
durable liner glazes and understand that the more of them you add to a
durable glaze the more chance that glaze will not be durable any more.
RR
Paul Lewing said -
>Here's my opinion: Nothing is cheating! The only thing that matters
>is what your art looks like when it's done. If it looks like what
>you wanted it to look like, that's good. Anything that detracts from
>that is bad.
Ron Roy
RR#4
15084 Little Lake Road
Brighton, Ontario
Canada
K0K 1H0
| |
|
